Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
During the Hangout on Wednesday multiple release proposals have been discussed. I summarized discussion here <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Hangout+October+24th+2018+8am+and+5pm+PDT> and updated the release proposal page <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release> . Please review, provide feedback and propose changes. I plan to start a lazy vote on Sunday regarding the release proposal. Calling for volunteers to manage the 1.3.1 and 1.4.0 release. Regards, Steffen On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 7:20 AM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Steffen, > > Recommend these be merged into patch release: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12631 > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12603 > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12499 > > -Kellen > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:17 AM Zhao, Patric wrote: > > > Thanks to let us know this discussion. > > Because we don't have enough bandwidth to track the different sources, > > like discussion forum. > > > > I think the best way is to open issue in the github so that we can > > answer/solve the issue in time :) > > > > Thanks, > > > > --Patric > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Afrooze, Sina [mailto:sina@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 1:14 AM > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > > Cc: Ye, Jason Y ; Zai, Alexander > > > ; Zheng, Da > > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > > > > > This post suggests there is a regression from 1.1.0 to 1.2.1 related to > > > MKLDNN integration: https://discuss.mxnet.io/t/mxnet-1-2-1-module-get- > > > outputs/1882 > > > > > > The error is related to MKLDNN layout not being converted back to MXNet > > > layout in some operator: " !IsMKLDNNData() We can’t generate TBlob for > > > MKLDNN data. Please use Reorder2Default() to generate a new NDArray > > > first" > > > > > > Sina > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/30/18, 6:55 PM, "Steffen Rochel" > wrote: > > > > > > Thanks Patrick. > > > Updated roadmap and next release content. > > > > > > Patrick - suggest to send a reminder to review the design doc and > > collect > > > feedback. > > > Are there still known issues or gaps before we declare MKL-DNN > > > integration > > > as GA? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Steffen > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:31 AM Zhao, Patric < > patric.z...@intel.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks, Steffen. > > > > > > > > Regarding the next release note, two items from our side: > > > > > > > > 1. (-remove) MKL-DNN integration is done. I think we can remove > > this > > > item. > > > > 2. (+add) MKL-DNN based graph optimization and quantization by > > > subgraph > > > > Design doc: > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Graph+Optimiz > > > ation+and+Quantization+based+on+subgraph+and+MKL-DNN > > > > Lead Contributor: Patric Zhao, > > https://github.com/pengzhao-intel/ > > > > > > > > Regarding the Roadmap > > > > (+add) Q1 2019: MKL-DNN RNN API supports > > > > > > > > BR, > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > --Patric > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] > > > > > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 11:31 AM > > > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > > > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > > > > > > > > > Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < > > > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I > > think > > > > > > this will go a long way in helping the community plan their > > work, even > > > &g
Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
Hey Steffen, Recommend these be merged into patch release: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12631 https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12603 https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12499 -Kellen On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:17 AM Zhao, Patric wrote: > Thanks to let us know this discussion. > Because we don't have enough bandwidth to track the different sources, > like discussion forum. > > I think the best way is to open issue in the github so that we can > answer/solve the issue in time :) > > Thanks, > > --Patric > > > -Original Message- > > From: Afrooze, Sina [mailto:sina@gmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 1:14 AM > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > Cc: Ye, Jason Y ; Zai, Alexander > > ; Zheng, Da > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > > > This post suggests there is a regression from 1.1.0 to 1.2.1 related to > > MKLDNN integration: https://discuss.mxnet.io/t/mxnet-1-2-1-module-get- > > outputs/1882 > > > > The error is related to MKLDNN layout not being converted back to MXNet > > layout in some operator: " !IsMKLDNNData() We can’t generate TBlob for > > MKLDNN data. Please use Reorder2Default() to generate a new NDArray > > first" > > > > Sina > > > > > > > > > > On 9/30/18, 6:55 PM, "Steffen Rochel" wrote: > > > > Thanks Patrick. > > Updated roadmap and next release content. > > > > Patrick - suggest to send a reminder to review the design doc and > collect > > feedback. > > Are there still known issues or gaps before we declare MKL-DNN > > integration > > as GA? > > > > Regards, > > Steffen > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:31 AM Zhao, Patric > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks, Steffen. > > > > > > Regarding the next release note, two items from our side: > > > > > > 1. (-remove) MKL-DNN integration is done. I think we can remove > this > > item. > > > 2. (+add) MKL-DNN based graph optimization and quantization by > > subgraph > > > Design doc: > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Graph+Optimiz > > ation+and+Quantization+based+on+subgraph+and+MKL-DNN > > > Lead Contributor: Patric Zhao, > https://github.com/pengzhao-intel/ > > > > > > Regarding the Roadmap > > > (+add) Q1 2019: MKL-DNN RNN API supports > > > > > > BR, > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > --Patric > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] > > > > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 11:31 AM > > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > > > > > > > Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < > > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I > think > > > > > this will go a long way in helping the community plan their > work, even > > > > > if the details change somewhat on the road to the release. > > > > > > > > > > Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT > with > > > > > the subgraph operator work. > > > > > > > > > > Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor > stack/buffer > > > > > overflows exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's > probably > > a > > > > > good idea to include them in a patch release, as they at best > result > > > > > in non-deterministic behaviour. > > > > > > > > > > -Kellen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> I updated > > > > >> > > > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+f > > > > >> or+next+MXNet+Releas
RE: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
Thanks to let us know this discussion. Because we don't have enough bandwidth to track the different sources, like discussion forum. I think the best way is to open issue in the github so that we can answer/solve the issue in time :) Thanks, --Patric > -Original Message- > From: Afrooze, Sina [mailto:sina@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 1:14 AM > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > Cc: Ye, Jason Y ; Zai, Alexander > ; Zheng, Da > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > This post suggests there is a regression from 1.1.0 to 1.2.1 related to > MKLDNN integration: https://discuss.mxnet.io/t/mxnet-1-2-1-module-get- > outputs/1882 > > The error is related to MKLDNN layout not being converted back to MXNet > layout in some operator: " !IsMKLDNNData() We can’t generate TBlob for > MKLDNN data. Please use Reorder2Default() to generate a new NDArray > first" > > Sina > > > > > On 9/30/18, 6:55 PM, "Steffen Rochel" wrote: > > Thanks Patrick. > Updated roadmap and next release content. > > Patrick - suggest to send a reminder to review the design doc and collect > feedback. > Are there still known issues or gaps before we declare MKL-DNN > integration > as GA? > > Regards, > Steffen > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:31 AM Zhao, Patric > wrote: > > > Thanks, Steffen. > > > > Regarding the next release note, two items from our side: > > > > 1. (-remove) MKL-DNN integration is done. I think we can remove this > item. > > 2. (+add) MKL-DNN based graph optimization and quantization by > subgraph > > Design doc: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Graph+Optimiz > ation+and+Quantization+based+on+subgraph+and+MKL-DNN > > Lead Contributor: Patric Zhao, https://github.com/pengzhao-intel/ > > > > Regarding the Roadmap > > (+add) Q1 2019: MKL-DNN RNN API supports > > > > BR, > > > > Thanks, > > > > --Patric > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 11:31 AM > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > > > > > Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I think > > > > this will go a long way in helping the community plan their work, > even > > > > if the details change somewhat on the road to the release. > > > > > > > > Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT with > > > > the subgraph operator work. > > > > > > > > Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor stack/buffer > > > > overflows exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's probably > a > > > > good idea to include them in a patch release, as they at best result > > > > in non-deterministic behaviour. > > > > > > > > -Kellen > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I updated > > > >> > > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+f > > > >> or+next+MXNet+Release > > > >> , > > > >> removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to > kick > > > >> off discussion about the next release. Please suggest what you > would > > > >> like to see included in the next release together with link to > design > > > >> proposal (appropriately for the size and complexity of the > proposal) > > > >> or suggest changes. > > > >> I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame the > > > >> discussion. > > > >> Lets include review of > > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap - > > > >> time to update and discuss changes. > > > >> > > > >> From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding > > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and > resolution > > > >> in > > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . > > > >> Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we > > > >> should consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we > > > >> include PR 12412 in a potential patch release? > > > >> > > > >> Regards, > > > >> Steffen > > > >> > > > > > > > >
RE: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
Thanks, Steffen. I will send the reminder again and currently Da, Jun, Haibin and Marco is reviewing our 1st PR (12530). Regarding MKL-DNN integration, the MKL-DNN backend reached GA now from my view. In the last development cycle, lots of tests, both unit tests and real models, are added to improve the quality. And we don't see any big defects in the current solution. Really thanks the efforts form Alex and Shufan adding a branch of test case. 1) unit test Such as PR, concat 11371, pool 11608, LRN 11831, Sum 11272, backward 11232, gluon 10921. The new CPP test located in https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/master/tests/cpp/operator/mkldnn.cc and the gluon test in https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/master/tests/python/unittest/test_gluon.py. 2) model level The model level coverage, including CV and non-CV models, are tracked in our local servers weekly with official master branch. The CV tests includes RESNET50, inception bn, SSD, etc; non-CV tests includes sockeye/GNMT, lstm_bucketing models, etc. All models we tracked can converged with the expected accuracy and performance. BTW, is there a check list for grading? If so, it's easy to evaluate objectively :) Thanks, --Patric > -Original Message- > From: Steffen Rochel [mailto:steffenroc...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 9:54 AM > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > Cc: Ye, Jason Y ; Zai, Alexander > ; Zheng, Da > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > Thanks Patrick. > Updated roadmap and next release content. > > Patrick - suggest to send a reminder to review the design doc and collect > feedback. > Are there still known issues or gaps before we declare MKL-DNN integration > as GA? > > Regards, > Steffen > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:31 AM Zhao, Patric wrote: > > > Thanks, Steffen. > > > > Regarding the next release note, two items from our side: > > > > 1. (-remove) MKL-DNN integration is done. I think we can remove this item. > > 2. (+add) MKL-DNN based graph optimization and quantization by > subgraph > > Design doc: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Graph+Optimiz > ation+and+Quantization+based+on+subgraph+and+MKL-DNN > > Lead Contributor: Patric Zhao, https://github.com/pengzhao-intel/ > > > > Regarding the Roadmap > > (+add) Q1 2019: MKL-DNN RNN API supports > > > > BR, > > > > Thanks, > > > > --Patric > > > > > > > -Original Message----- > > > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 11:31 AM > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > > > > > Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I > > > > think this will go a long way in helping the community plan their > > > > work, even if the details change somewhat on the road to the release. > > > > > > > > Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT > > > > with the subgraph operator work. > > > > > > > > Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor stack/buffer > > > > overflows exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's probably > > > > a good idea to include them in a patch release, as they at best > > > > result in non-deterministic behaviour. > > > > > > > > -Kellen > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I updated > > > >> > > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposa > > > >> ls+f > > > >> or+next+MXNet+Release > > > >> , > > > >> removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to > > > >> kick off discussion about the next release. Please suggest what > > > >> you would like to see included in the next release together with > > > >> link to design proposal (appropriately for the size and > > > >> complexity of the proposal) or suggest changes. > > > >> I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame > > > >> the discussion. > > > >> Lets include review of > > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap - > > > >> time to update and discuss changes. > > > >> > > > >> From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding > > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and > > > >> resolution in > > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . > > > >> Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we > > > >> should consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we > > > >> include PR 12412 in a potential patch release? > > > >> > > > >> Regards, > > > >> Steffen > > > >> > > > > > >
Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
I found 2 bugs related to gluon Trainer with distributed KVStore. Basically if someone uses Gluon for distributed training with a learning rate schedule (e.g. train ResNet50 for image classification), it won't work. https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/12713 I have the fix for the first bug locally, but I don't have the fix for the second one. Best, Haibin On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 10:14 AM Afrooze, Sina wrote: > This post suggests there is a regression from 1.1.0 to 1.2.1 related to > MKLDNN integration: > https://discuss.mxnet.io/t/mxnet-1-2-1-module-get-outputs/1882 > > The error is related to MKLDNN layout not being converted back to MXNet > layout in some operator: " !IsMKLDNNData() We can’t generate TBlob for > MKLDNN data. Please use Reorder2Default() to generate a new NDArray first" > > Sina > > > > > On 9/30/18, 6:55 PM, "Steffen Rochel" wrote: > > Thanks Patrick. > Updated roadmap and next release content. > > Patrick - suggest to send a reminder to review the design doc and > collect > feedback. > Are there still known issues or gaps before we declare MKL-DNN > integration > as GA? > > Regards, > Steffen > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:31 AM Zhao, Patric > wrote: > > > Thanks, Steffen. > > > > Regarding the next release note, two items from our side: > > > > 1. (-remove) MKL-DNN integration is done. I think we can remove this > item. > > 2. (+add) MKL-DNN based graph optimization and quantization by > subgraph > > Design doc: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Graph+Optimization+and+Quantization+based+on+subgraph+and+MKL-DNN > > Lead Contributor: Patric Zhao, > https://github.com/pengzhao-intel/ > > > > Regarding the Roadmap > > (+add) Q1 2019: MKL-DNN RNN API supports > > > > BR, > > > > Thanks, > > > > --Patric > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] > > > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 11:31 AM > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > > > > > Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < > > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I > think > > > > this will go a long way in helping the community plan their > work, even > > > > if the details change somewhat on the road to the release. > > > > > > > > Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT > with > > > > the subgraph operator work. > > > > > > > > Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor stack/buffer > > > > overflows exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's > probably a > > > > good idea to include them in a patch release, as they at best > result > > > > in non-deterministic behaviour. > > > > > > > > -Kellen > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I updated > > > >> > > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+f > > > >> or+next+MXNet+Release > > > >> , > > > >> removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to > kick > > > >> off discussion about the next release. Please suggest what you > would > > > >> like to see included in the next release together with link to > design > > > >> proposal (appropriately for the size and complexity of the > proposal) > > > >> or suggest changes. > > > >> I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame > the > > > >> discussion. > > > >> Lets include review of > > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap > - > > > >> time to update and discuss changes. > > > >> > > > >> From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding > > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and > resolution > > > >> in > > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . > > > >> Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we > > > >> should consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we > > > >> include PR 12412 in a potential patch release? > > > >> > > > >> Regards, > > > >> Steffen > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
This post suggests there is a regression from 1.1.0 to 1.2.1 related to MKLDNN integration: https://discuss.mxnet.io/t/mxnet-1-2-1-module-get-outputs/1882 The error is related to MKLDNN layout not being converted back to MXNet layout in some operator: " !IsMKLDNNData() We can’t generate TBlob for MKLDNN data. Please use Reorder2Default() to generate a new NDArray first" Sina On 9/30/18, 6:55 PM, "Steffen Rochel" wrote: Thanks Patrick. Updated roadmap and next release content. Patrick - suggest to send a reminder to review the design doc and collect feedback. Are there still known issues or gaps before we declare MKL-DNN integration as GA? Regards, Steffen On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:31 AM Zhao, Patric wrote: > Thanks, Steffen. > > Regarding the next release note, two items from our side: > > 1. (-remove) MKL-DNN integration is done. I think we can remove this item. > 2. (+add) MKL-DNN based graph optimization and quantization by subgraph > Design doc: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Graph+Optimization+and+Quantization+based+on+subgraph+and+MKL-DNN > Lead Contributor: Patric Zhao, https://github.com/pengzhao-intel/ > > Regarding the Roadmap > (+add) Q1 2019: MKL-DNN RNN API supports > > BR, > > Thanks, > > --Patric > > > > -Original Message- > > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 11:31 AM > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > > > Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I think > > > this will go a long way in helping the community plan their work, even > > > if the details change somewhat on the road to the release. > > > > > > Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT with > > > the subgraph operator work. > > > > > > Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor stack/buffer > > > overflows exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's probably a > > > good idea to include them in a patch release, as they at best result > > > in non-deterministic behaviour. > > > > > > -Kellen > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I updated > > >> > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+f > > >> or+next+MXNet+Release > > >> , > > >> removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to kick > > >> off discussion about the next release. Please suggest what you would > > >> like to see included in the next release together with link to design > > >> proposal (appropriately for the size and complexity of the proposal) > > >> or suggest changes. > > >> I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame the > > >> discussion. > > >> Lets include review of > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap - > > >> time to update and discuss changes. > > >> > > >> From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and resolution > > >> in > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . > > >> Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we > > >> should consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we > > >> include PR 12412 in a potential patch release? > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Steffen > > >> > > > >
Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
Thanks Patrick. Updated roadmap and next release content. Patrick - suggest to send a reminder to review the design doc and collect feedback. Are there still known issues or gaps before we declare MKL-DNN integration as GA? Regards, Steffen On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:31 AM Zhao, Patric wrote: > Thanks, Steffen. > > Regarding the next release note, two items from our side: > > 1. (-remove) MKL-DNN integration is done. I think we can remove this item. > 2. (+add) MKL-DNN based graph optimization and quantization by subgraph > Design doc: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Graph+Optimization+and+Quantization+based+on+subgraph+and+MKL-DNN > Lead Contributor: Patric Zhao, https://github.com/pengzhao-intel/ > > Regarding the Roadmap > (+add) Q1 2019: MKL-DNN RNN API supports > > BR, > > Thanks, > > --Patric > > > > -Original Message- > > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2018 11:31 AM > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release > > > > Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I think > > > this will go a long way in helping the community plan their work, even > > > if the details change somewhat on the road to the release. > > > > > > Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT with > > > the subgraph operator work. > > > > > > Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor stack/buffer > > > overflows exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's probably a > > > good idea to include them in a patch release, as they at best result > > > in non-deterministic behaviour. > > > > > > -Kellen > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> I updated > > >> > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+f > > >> or+next+MXNet+Release > > >> , > > >> removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to kick > > >> off discussion about the next release. Please suggest what you would > > >> like to see included in the next release together with link to design > > >> proposal (appropriately for the size and complexity of the proposal) > > >> or suggest changes. > > >> I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame the > > >> discussion. > > >> Lets include review of > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap - > > >> time to update and discuss changes. > > >> > > >> From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and resolution > > >> in > > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . > > >> Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we > > >> should consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we > > >> include PR 12412 in a potential patch release? > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Steffen > > >> > > > >
Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
Kellen - please send a list of PR to consider for patch release. Steffen On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 8:27 PM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I think this > will go a long way in helping the community plan their work, even if the > details change somewhat on the road to the release. > > Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT with the > subgraph operator work. > > Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor stack/buffer overflows > exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's probably a good idea to > include them in a patch release, as they at best result in > non-deterministic behaviour. > > -Kellen > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel > wrote: > > > I updated > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release > > , > > removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to kick off > > discussion about the next release. Please suggest what you would like to > > see included in the next release together with link to design proposal > > (appropriately for the size and complexity of the proposal) or suggest > > changes. > > I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame the > > discussion. > > Lets include review of > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap - time > to > > update and discuss changes. > > > > From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and resolution in > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . > > Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we should > > consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we include PR 12412 > in > > a potential patch release? > > > > Regards, > > Steffen > > >
Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
Sorry I meant to say next 'Regarding the *minor* release'. On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:27 AM kellen sunderland < kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I think this > will go a long way in helping the community plan their work, even if the > details change somewhat on the road to the release. > > Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT with the > subgraph operator work. > > Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor stack/buffer > overflows exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's probably a good > idea to include them in a patch release, as they at best result in > non-deterministic behaviour. > > -Kellen > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel > wrote: > >> I updated >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release >> , >> removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to kick off >> discussion about the next release. Please suggest what you would like to >> see included in the next release together with link to design proposal >> (appropriately for the size and complexity of the proposal) or suggest >> changes. >> I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame the >> discussion. >> Lets include review of >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap - time to >> update and discuss changes. >> >> From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and resolution in >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . >> Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we should >> consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we include PR 12412 >> in >> a potential patch release? >> >> Regards, >> Steffen >> >
Re: [Discuss] Next MXNet release
Thanks for transparently setting a rough timeline Steffen. I think this will go a long way in helping the community plan their work, even if the details change somewhat on the road to the release. Regarding the major release: I would propose we unify TensorRT with the subgraph operator work. Regarding the patch release: There were a few minor stack/buffer overflows exposed by ASAN that have been addressed. It's probably a good idea to include them in a patch release, as they at best result in non-deterministic behaviour. -Kellen On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:39 AM Steffen Rochel wrote: > I updated > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release > , > removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to kick off > discussion about the next release. Please suggest what you would like to > see included in the next release together with link to design proposal > (appropriately for the size and complexity of the proposal) or suggest > changes. > I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame the > discussion. > Lets include review of > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap - time to > update and discuss changes. > > From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and resolution in > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . > Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we should > consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we include PR 12412 in > a potential patch release? > > Regards, > Steffen >
[Discuss] Next MXNet release
I updated https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/Project+Proposals+for+next+MXNet+Release, removed the completed items from 1.3 release and would like to kick off discussion about the next release. Please suggest what you would like to see included in the next release together with link to design proposal (appropriately for the size and complexity of the proposal) or suggest changes. I suggest to target the next release for December 2018 to frame the discussion. Lets include review of https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/MXNet+Roadmap - time to update and discuss changes. >From the 1.3 release we had discussion regarding https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11849 and resolution in https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12412 . Are you aware of critical issues and feedback from user which we should consider for a potential 1.3.1 patch release. Should we include PR 12412 in a potential patch release? Regards, Steffen
